§ 36a-290 — (Formerly Sec. 36-3). Joint deposit and share accounts.

Connecticut § 36a-290

• Jurisdiction: Connecticut
• Title 36a: The Banking Law of Connecticut
• Ch. 665a: Deposits

Text

(a) When a deposit account has been established at any bank, or a share account has been established at any Connecticut credit union or federal credit union, in the names of two or more natural persons and under such terms as to be paid to any one of them, or to the survivor or survivors of them, such account is deemed a joint account, and any part or all of the balance of such account, including any and all subsequent deposits or additions made thereto, may be paid to any of such persons during the lifetime of all of them or to the survivor or any of the survivors of such persons after the death of one or more of them. Any such payment constitutes a valid and sufficient release and discharge of such bank, Connecticut credit union or federal credit union, or its successor, as to all payments so made. (b) The establishment of a deposit account or share account which is a joint account under subsection (a) of this section is, in the absence of fraud or undue influence or a preponderance of the evidence to the contrary, prima facie evidence of the intention of all of the named owners thereof to vest title to such account, including all subsequent deposits and additions made thereto, in such survivor or survivors, in any action or proceeding between any two or more of the depositors, respecting the ownership of such account or its proceeds. (c) This section shall not apply to any deposit account or share account where any owner died before October 1, 1971, nor shall it apply to any action pending on that date.

Legislative History

(1953, S. 2779d; 1961, P.A. 405; 1971, P.A. 417; P.A. 78-121, S. 10, 113; P.A. 88-65, S. 7; P.A. 92-12, S. 2; P.A. 94-122, S. 131, 340; P.A. 23-161, S. 5.) History: 1961 act clarified application of statute to accounts issued to more than two persons; 1971 act added “or other clear and convincing evidence to the contrary” and substituted “prima facie” for “conclusive” evidence in Subsec. (1) and changed applicability in Subsec. (2) to exclude “any” owner rather than “either” owner who died before October 1, 1971, rather than October 1, 1953; P.A. 78-121 deleted references to deposits in building associations and private banks in Subsec. (1); P.A. 88-65 deleted a reference to industrial banks in Subsec. (1); P.A. 92-12 redesignated Subsecs. and made technical changes; P.A. 94-122 made technical changes, divided former Subsec. (a) into Subsecs. (a) and (b), and relettered former Subsec. (b) as Subsec. (c), effective January 1, 1995; Sec. 36-3 transferred to Sec. 36a-290 in 1995; P.A. 23-161 amended Subsec. (b) to make a technical change and replace “other clear and convincing “ with “a preponderance of the”. Annotations to former section 36-3: Cited. 139 C. 350; 142 C. 257. Intent of legislature is to give to the survivors an unrebuttable presumption of ownership, but the determination of the respective rights of the parties inter vivos is left to the common law. 154 C. 456. Cited. 172 C. 292; 176 C. 657; 177 C. 53; 183 C. 96; 195 C. 82; 226 C. 51; 232 C. 172. Cited. 2 CA 430. Legislative rule of evidence which has the effect of shifting a burden of proof is not an unconstitutional invasion of the legislative into the judicial sphere; statute affects the introduction of evidence, it does not impinge on independence of the judicial branch. Id., 622. Cited. 7 CA 735; 13 CA 662. Cited. 43 CS 360. Annotations to present section: Cited. 240 C. 343. Section does not immunize joint account holders from criminal consequences for improper withdrawals, and the determination of ownership of joint funds as between coholders is a question of fact dependent on the intent of the joint account holders and all circumstances surrounding the joint account's creation and maintenance. 307 C. 592. Testimony that joint account was created to help pay decedent's expenses is not clear and convincing evidence sufficient to overcome statutory presumption that it was intended to be a gift to the survivor; such payment of expenses is not inconsistent with an intent to vest title in the surviving account holder. 60 CA 665. Subsec. (a): Serves only as a bank protection provision and does not determine ownership interests in funds in joint account. 79 CA 112. Subsec. (b): Where one owner of joint account dies, two survivors have ownership interests in account funds and trial court's finding that one owner's withdrawal of all funds was a conversion of funds was not clearly erroneous. 79 CA 112.